After three years of working with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, I do have genuine feedback on areas where I feel there is room for improvement. The initial configuration complexity is one area; the onboarding and initial policy setup is not the most intuitive experience. When we first deployed, the learning curve was steeper than expected, especially around setting up app connectors correctly and fine-tuning ZPA policy. Better guided setup wizards or more structured onboarding support would help significantly. Another area is pricing transparency; the licensing model can be quite complex and expensive, especially for large organizations. Understanding exactly what is included in each tier and what requires an additional license is not always straightforward, so a more transparent and flexible pricing structure would be welcome. Reporting and analytics could also be improved; while the dashboard gives good visibility, the out-of-the-box reporting could be more customizable, as we often find ourselves exporting data and building custom reports externally. Troubleshooting and diagnostics also need attention; when something goes wrong, such as an application access issue, the troubleshooting experience could be smoother; pinpointing exactly where a policy is blocking something sometimes takes more time than it should. Technical support response time could be faster for critical issues. Integration improvement is one area; while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform integrates well with Azure AD, we have faced some friction when trying to integrate with other SIEM platforms. At our organization, we use multiple security tools across different client environments, and getting Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform logs to flow seamlessly into every SIEM we work with is not always plug-and-play. Better native integration with a wide range of SIEM and SOAR platforms would be really valuable. Additionally, offline mode capabilities, AI-driven policy enhancements, and more granular role-based access control are important features to consider.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience. I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time. Some vulnerabilities create issues, and when we wanted to identify the source of the vulnerabilities, specifically focusing on mobile ID and related areas, it was unable to provide assistance. However, according to discussions with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, they said that by the end of mid-2026, they are exploring these features, and probably those features can be incorporated or embedded into this particular system. That is the only major negative point.In terms of responses, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is good. In terms of controlling vulnerability, it is good. The only cons I have noticed is that it is a bit slower, and sometimes it is unable to identify the source. These are the key areas for improvement.
I believe Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform can be improved, but I have no specific feedback based on my procurement experience. There is nothing I would change at this time regarding needed improvements.
There are connection errors sometimes when users move from one location to another location, which can cause latency issues. Regarding the initial setup and deployment, there should be an export option from older tools to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. This export function would eliminate the need to start from basics. Some rules should be exportable and directly importable to the platform. Additionally, more automation efforts could be included.
There is not much room for improvement. We are users and operational engineers, so we might not have the insight that solution providers have when they compare different solutions. They might be able to identify if something is missing with Zscaler.
Learn what your peers think about Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: May 2026.
Security Architect at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Reseller
Jun 5, 2024
The technical team in our company suggests there are some performance issues with the solution once the module addition begins. For instance, suppose I am using Zscaler Internet Access, and the connectivity speed is excellent, but the moment I start integrating some add-ons like DLP, then the solution considerably slows down in functionality. But I believe the aforementioned instance or scenario is acceptable because an initial data check gets performed upon integration and it probably can be solved by the vendor through some alterations in the architecture. The set of features provided by Zscaler DLP is enough for the market in which our company operates.
IT Consultant at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Top 20
Jan 15, 2024
Occasionally, issues arise in the LogStack by a third party, particularly for government websites accessed by numerous users. This can trigger false positives, causing certain IP ranges to be perceived as a security threat or associated with malicious activities, resulting in blocks. In such instances, we often find ourselves waiting for the block to be lifted or having to engage with the concerned website administrators. This is where Zscaler's expertise becomes crucial in addressing false positive blocks, as these incidents might not necessarily indicate malicious intent but could be errors affecting access to the platform. It is recommended that they incorporate EDR features into their offerings.
Snr Presales Cyber Security Engineer: Palo Alto| F5 at Westcon-Comstor
Real User
Nov 3, 2023
A suggestion for improvement is the development of their own proprietary SD-WAN device. Currently, the experience can vary when integrating cloud protection with different vendors, such as Palo Alto, Meraki, or Juniper. Having a Zscaler-specific device could streamline this process and provide a more consistent user experience across diverse branches. Additionally, expanding their offerings to include solutions like SIEM, similar to competitors, could enhance their portfolio and cater to clients interested in a broader range of services.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange enhances security with seamless cloud-based connectivity and VPN-less operation, offering integration with multiple identity providers and advanced security features, suitable for remote work environments.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange provides secure, adaptive connectivity without traditional VPNs, allowing organizations to replace legacy systems and bolster remote work security. The platform offers cloud-based protection, single sign-on, dynamic URL categorization,...
After three years of working with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, I do have genuine feedback on areas where I feel there is room for improvement. The initial configuration complexity is one area; the onboarding and initial policy setup is not the most intuitive experience. When we first deployed, the learning curve was steeper than expected, especially around setting up app connectors correctly and fine-tuning ZPA policy. Better guided setup wizards or more structured onboarding support would help significantly. Another area is pricing transparency; the licensing model can be quite complex and expensive, especially for large organizations. Understanding exactly what is included in each tier and what requires an additional license is not always straightforward, so a more transparent and flexible pricing structure would be welcome. Reporting and analytics could also be improved; while the dashboard gives good visibility, the out-of-the-box reporting could be more customizable, as we often find ourselves exporting data and building custom reports externally. Troubleshooting and diagnostics also need attention; when something goes wrong, such as an application access issue, the troubleshooting experience could be smoother; pinpointing exactly where a policy is blocking something sometimes takes more time than it should. Technical support response time could be faster for critical issues. Integration improvement is one area; while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform integrates well with Azure AD, we have faced some friction when trying to integrate with other SIEM platforms. At our organization, we use multiple security tools across different client environments, and getting Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform logs to flow seamlessly into every SIEM we work with is not always plug-and-play. Better native integration with a wide range of SIEM and SOAR platforms would be really valuable. Additionally, offline mode capabilities, AI-driven policy enhancements, and more granular role-based access control are important features to consider.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience. I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time. Some vulnerabilities create issues, and when we wanted to identify the source of the vulnerabilities, specifically focusing on mobile ID and related areas, it was unable to provide assistance. However, according to discussions with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, they said that by the end of mid-2026, they are exploring these features, and probably those features can be incorporated or embedded into this particular system. That is the only major negative point.In terms of responses, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is good. In terms of controlling vulnerability, it is good. The only cons I have noticed is that it is a bit slower, and sometimes it is unable to identify the source. These are the key areas for improvement.
I believe Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform can be improved, but I have no specific feedback based on my procurement experience. There is nothing I would change at this time regarding needed improvements.
There are connection errors sometimes when users move from one location to another location, which can cause latency issues. Regarding the initial setup and deployment, there should be an export option from older tools to the Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform. This export function would eliminate the need to start from basics. Some rules should be exportable and directly importable to the platform. Additionally, more automation efforts could be included.
There is not much room for improvement. We are users and operational engineers, so we might not have the insight that solution providers have when they compare different solutions. They might be able to identify if something is missing with Zscaler.
The technical team in our company suggests there are some performance issues with the solution once the module addition begins. For instance, suppose I am using Zscaler Internet Access, and the connectivity speed is excellent, but the moment I start integrating some add-ons like DLP, then the solution considerably slows down in functionality. But I believe the aforementioned instance or scenario is acceptable because an initial data check gets performed upon integration and it probably can be solved by the vendor through some alterations in the architecture. The set of features provided by Zscaler DLP is enough for the market in which our company operates.
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
Occasionally, issues arise in the LogStack by a third party, particularly for government websites accessed by numerous users. This can trigger false positives, causing certain IP ranges to be perceived as a security threat or associated with malicious activities, resulting in blocks. In such instances, we often find ourselves waiting for the block to be lifted or having to engage with the concerned website administrators. This is where Zscaler's expertise becomes crucial in addressing false positive blocks, as these incidents might not necessarily indicate malicious intent but could be errors affecting access to the platform. It is recommended that they incorporate EDR features into their offerings.
A suggestion for improvement is the development of their own proprietary SD-WAN device. Currently, the experience can vary when integrating cloud protection with different vendors, such as Palo Alto, Meraki, or Juniper. Having a Zscaler-specific device could streamline this process and provide a more consistent user experience across diverse branches. Additionally, expanding their offerings to include solutions like SIEM, similar to competitors, could enhance their portfolio and cater to clients interested in a broader range of services.